The Stacks project

Noether normalization

Lemma 10.115.4. Let $k$ be a field. Let $S = k[x_1, \ldots , x_ n]/I$ for some ideal $I$. If $I \neq (1)$, there exist $r\geq 0$, and $y_1, \ldots , y_ r \in k[x_1, \ldots , x_ n]$ such that (a) the map $k[y_1, \ldots , y_ r] \to S$ is injective, and (b) the map $k[y_1, \ldots , y_ r] \to S$ is finite. In this case the integer $r$ is the dimension of $S$. Moreover we may choose $y_ i$ to be in the $\mathbf{Z}$-subalgebra of $k[x_1, \ldots , x_ n]$ generated by $x_1, \ldots , x_ n$.

Proof. By induction on $n$, with $n = 0$ being trivial. If $I = 0$, then take $r = n$ and $y_ i = x_ i$. If $I \not= 0$, then choose $y_1, \ldots , y_{n-1}$ as in Lemma 10.115.3. Let $S' \subset S$ be the subring generated by the images of the $y_ i$. By induction we can choose $r$ and $z_1, \ldots , z_ r \in k[y_1, \ldots , y_{n-1}]$ such that (a), (b) hold for $k[z_1, \ldots , z_ r] \to S'$. Since $S' \to S$ is injective and finite we see (a), (b) hold for $k[z_1, \ldots , z_ r] \to S$. The last assertion follows from Lemma 10.112.4. $\square$


Comments (4)

Comment #2947 by Dario Weißmann on

Nitpick: should obviously be a proper ideal. It's hard to fit a field into the zero-ring.

Comment #6597 by suggestion_bot on

Suggested tag: Noether normalization

There are also:

  • 2 comment(s) on Section 10.115: Noether normalization

Post a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked.

In your comment you can use Markdown and LaTeX style mathematics (enclose it like $\pi$). A preview option is available if you wish to see how it works out (just click on the eye in the toolbar).

Unfortunately JavaScript is disabled in your browser, so the comment preview function will not work.

All contributions are licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.




In order to prevent bots from posting comments, we would like you to prove that you are human. You can do this by filling in the name of the current tag in the following input field. As a reminder, this is tag 00OY. Beware of the difference between the letter 'O' and the digit '0'.